billcarey Posted June 26, 2000 Share Posted June 26, 2000 I just ran into a REALLY (imho) gamey tactic - a person who shall remain nameless bought about 40 MMG Carriers for 9/thing and a couple of Daimler ACs. He rushed the MMG Carriers around my Jpz IV and it killed them over and over, but while it was spinning in circles it was killed by the Daimler AC. To me this is gamey, to purchase crappy vehicles and sacrifice them to get one kill. Also - the MMG Carrier is one hell of a vehicle for 9 points... - Bill Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Scott Clinton Posted June 26, 2000 Share Posted June 26, 2000 Just wondering, was this a 'ladder game'? ------------------ Please note: The above is solely the opinion of 'The Grumbling Grognard' and reflects no one else's views but his own. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
L.Tankersley Posted June 26, 2000 Share Posted June 26, 2000 LOL. Maybe that's the secret behind the 100 jeeps vs a king tiger in OAOW - one of those jeeps has a guy with a bazooka or a demo charge in it, and odds are you won't get him before he reaches your rear. This is a problem when you don't enforce some kind of reality check on unit purchases. I actually am quite enjoying quick battles letting the computer choose forces - it gives you quite a variety. This morning I had a small German PanzerGrenadier force - one platoon mounted in HTs, one afoot, plus a Marder II and the HT with a short-barrelled 75mm gun (forget the designation of that one -- minus 10 grog pts for me). Lost both the Marder and the HT to an M8 and then a Hellcat showed up and started brewing up my SPWs. But I got one M8 with a panzerfaust, and my 81mm mortar team took out the Hellcat AND the second M8 with his last 3 rounds of HE to save the day. ------------------ Leland J. Tankersley Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SS_PanzerLeader Posted June 26, 2000 Share Posted June 26, 2000 How many kills would that Tank accounted for if he had not taken it out? This is a similar tactic to the stuart rush in CC2, taking the advantage of speed over power. I'm not sure that wasting all that stuff to get a measly JPIV is worth it IMHO. To take out something larger that stalled an advance maybe, if and only if most of the moving vehicles int he assault could at least successfully destroy the target - Had the ratio of bren carriers been the lesser and a few larger faster vehicles used in greater proportion I think it would've been more aceptable of a tactic. ------------------ SS_PanzerLeader.......out Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Big Time Software Posted June 26, 2000 Share Posted June 26, 2000 Question is... who won the battle? Steve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billcarey Posted June 26, 2000 Author Share Posted June 26, 2000 Not me - why are MMG Carriers so ridiculously cheap? - Bill Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darstand Posted June 26, 2000 Share Posted June 26, 2000 A Jeep WITH a MG is CHEAPER;than one without! HUH?!?! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Big Time Software Posted June 26, 2000 Share Posted June 26, 2000 Jeeps with MGs have no room for transport. It's give and take. Charles Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Papa Khann Posted June 26, 2000 Share Posted June 26, 2000 This issue is the very reason why I prefer to let the computer choose the forces when I play Quick Battle games. IMHO, it's much more realistic. Just like a commander in the real world, you have to try to make the most of what you're given, rather than choosing exactly what you want. It also avoids the unfortunate instances where some players choose a highly unlikely/unrealistic TO&E. Just my two cents. Papa Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jarmo Posted June 26, 2000 Share Posted June 26, 2000 I'm thinking atound the same lines as SS. I don't think that's a totally gamey tactic. Sure, rushing 40 carriers to their deaths, is not OK. A distraction by few of them, showing themselves at longer range, causing the Panzer to turn and reveal a weak side, would IMHO be OK. Just makes me think there really should be a "just-stay-here-and-dont-rotate-unless-your-life-depends-on-it-order" or JSHADRUYLDOI for shortness Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KiloIndiaAlpha Posted June 26, 2000 Share Posted June 26, 2000 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by billcarey: I just ran into a REALLY (imho) gamey tactic - a person who shall remain nameless bought about 40 MMG Carriers for 9/thing and a couple of Daimler ACs. He rushed the MMG Carriers around my Jpz IV and it killed them over and over, but while it was spinning in circles it was killed by the Daimler AC. To me this is gamey, to purchase crappy vehicles and sacrifice them to get one kill. Also - the MMG Carrier is one hell of a vehicle for 9 points... - Bill<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Name him and shame him!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kmead Posted June 26, 2000 Share Posted June 26, 2000 Sounds like a classic Ogre vehicle choice to me. I recall that was one of the many ways you could choose your forces to stop the strong but slow Ogre MBT. Yeah its gamey but fun. I also recall something similar in the novel "Davis" about a fictional military leader who used unusual tactics and application of forces. Of course he was vilified for it and as I recall died in the book (sort of reminded me of the Billy Mitchell story...). No I wouldn't do it in a WW2 sim unless the other party was aware that I might choose to use a very unrealistic TOE. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ASL Veteran Posted June 26, 2000 Share Posted June 26, 2000 That sort of thing wouldn't bother me in the slightest. If you had a balanced force you could stop a ridiculous force like that with little trouble. Lets say you bought a panzergrenadier platoon or something rather than one SP gun - what would the results have been then? I don't have the game (yet) so I can't see the point breakdown, but a balanced force should prevail over an unbalanced force (unless the unbalanced force has something you can't stop of course - but Bren carriers don't fit that description). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eridani Posted June 26, 2000 Share Posted June 26, 2000 Ok, I have to chime in to correct a few exaggerations on Bills part (sorry bill ) I was Bill's opponent... I purchased 18 mmg carriers at 9 pts/apeace to bring my point total up even to my max. Now, realize, this was my first time playing to full game so I had no idea what most of the stuff was and I was playing someone who had been playing all week ... I chose the mmg carrier simply because it had A gun (not a great one, but one) and could just be a presence on the battlefield for distraction/light suppression. As for other vehicals, I chose 2 Wolverine TD's, 1 Churchill VIII, and a pair of Daimler AC's. The battle started and I split all of my mmg carriers up into groups of 4 and had them start moving forward from one cover to another to scout forward for enemy positions (NOT a gamey tactic)... My MMG's came under fire from what I identified as a STUG III and I moved my wolverines to attack it. After exchanging a few shots One of my wolverines took a hit and exploded like nobodies business leaving me with 1 vehical with any anti-tank capability. At this point I told my flank group of MMG carriers to charge to PZIV it hopes just to distract it, because as far as I was concerned, I only had 1 vehical left with any AT capability and it was about to be butchered like my other wolverine was (at this point, I didn't know the Diamler Ac's could kill tanks). My MMG carriers surprised both the PZIV and a hetzer on top of the hill. Unable to touch them, I just told them to litterally run circles around the enemy guns until I could get something better into position. Over the next few minutes the German guns took two of the three out, so I rushed 3 more into the fray. At this point my other wolverine bought it to a Schreck hit, but one of my diamler AC's took a shot from across the map and scored a hit on the PZIV. The remaining MMG carriers continued to circle the Hetzer until I moved the Daimler AC in closer and knocked it out. Total losses on the hill, 5 mmg carriers and 2 wolverines for 1 pziv gun and 1 hetzer. I believe I lost 2 or 3 other mmg carriers to a 20 mm flak gun before knocking it out with a rush of 3 carriers. I must say, I honestly do not believe my play was all that gamey. I DO think the MMG carrier is a little too cheap for its effectiveness (An MMG carrier should at LEAST be more expensive than an MMG team). But I honestly believe I was simply using my rescources at hand to accomplish my task. I believe we have a movie or two from the game (unfortunately, I don't think we saved the movie of my little mmg carrier running circles around the Pziv gun... I was litterally rolling on the floor laughing ) I'd love to hear anyone elses input on this. btw, I won the battle, after his guns were out of the fight, it was a simple matter of using my remaining MMG carriers to supress his infantry while my churchill pounded them from across the map. -EridanMan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff Heidman Posted June 26, 2000 Share Posted June 26, 2000 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> My MMG carriers surprised both the PZIV and a hetzer on top of the hill. Unable to touch them, I just told them to litterally run circles around the enemy guns until I could get something better into position. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Sorry, but that is *definitely* gamey. Could you really see yourself ordering those men to go drive their vehicles in circles around an enemy tank? Do you really think they would actually do it? Tactics like these are the textbook example of "gamey". Jeff Heidman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Scott Clinton Posted June 26, 2000 Share Posted June 26, 2000 "gamey" = Things done in a game that would NEVER happen in real life. Yep, gamey IMO. ------------------ Please note: The above is solely the opinion of 'The Grumbling Grognard' and reflects no one else's views but his own. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SS_PanzerLeader Posted June 27, 2000 Share Posted June 27, 2000 Erindani - had you swarmed the tank with something that could've actually killed it I think the general responses wouldve been more accepting JMO ------------------ SS_PanzerLeader.......out Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OberGrupenStompinFeuhrer! Posted June 27, 2000 Share Posted June 27, 2000 I am wondering about the morale issue here. Why did the carrier drivers actually carry out those orders? If you send a squad of infantry walking across open ground towards a MG position, they will invariably drop to the ground for cover, or start running for cover. Only occasionaly will they actually continue into the fire. So why didn't the carrier drivers bug out? Ober ------------------ "Them Yankees couldn't hit the broa..." [This message has been edited by OberGrupenStompinFeuhrer! (edited 06-26-2000).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest grunto Posted June 27, 2000 Share Posted June 27, 2000 -Could you really see yourself ordering those men to go drive their vehicles in circles around an enemy tank? Do you really think they would actually do it?- yes i could see some crazies doing that. speed kills but 9 points does seem cheap. weird things happen in battle. andy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kump Posted June 27, 2000 Share Posted June 27, 2000 Eridani, I'm going with the gamey vote. You were taking advantage of the Tac-AI targeting routines. It ignored the greater threat, your Daimler. It was too busy targeting on the harmless carriers when it should have registered the Daimler as the extreme threat, attacking it and/or getting out of the way. In future patches, maybe the targeting will be changed/improved. In that case, you may have to come up with another 'tactic'. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMC Posted June 27, 2000 Share Posted June 27, 2000 Kump, you are making the assumption that the jgpz IV even spotted the Daimler. The jgpz IV must have been buttoned and when buttoned it can't see much of anything. I will reserve judgment on whether that tactic was gamey. I like the discrepancy between the two sides' perspectives on the fight: "bought about 40 MMG Carriers for 9/thing and a couple of Daimler ACs." vs "I purchased 18 mmg carriers at 9 pts/apeace to bring my point total up even to my max." To me it kinda looks like someone got burned because he was thinking "inside the box" while his opponent was able to think "outside the box" because he didn't have any ideas about "balanced forces" and was new to the DYO game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seanachai Posted June 27, 2000 Share Posted June 27, 2000 Have to go with a 'Gamey Tactic Without Malice Aforethought'. He doesn't seem to have gone into the battle with a 'gamey tactic' in mind, just a rather bizarre and ahistorical force mix. No question, though, that when the situation arose, the actual tactic is one you wouldn't find outside a Hollywood 'Comedy/War' movie. Points up the importance of people who're going to play blind Quick Battles agreeing on what it is they're setting out to do. It would never occur to me to 'buy' that kind of force, because, well, because there's no way any battle was fought with a force like that. I wouldn't choose to put together a force that off-beat unless my opponent and I had agreed we were setting out to play an off-the-wall, points-for-weirdness type game. I don't necessarily feel you need to use rigid organizational guidelines, but the players need to be in basic agreement about the historical/realism nature of the game. A lesson to me: when playing blind Quick Battles, make sure both parties are on the same wavelength before agreeing to a game! Sheesh, multiple edits for odd typos! ------------------ After witnessing exceptional bravery from his Celtic mercenaries, Alexander the Great called them to him and asked if there was anything they feared. They told him nothing, except that the sky might fall on their heads. [This message has been edited by Seanachai (edited 06-27-2000).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Big Time Software Posted June 27, 2000 Share Posted June 27, 2000 Charles and I are talking about the larger issue, but the problem with the TacAI is most likely something we can't fix. The Daimler is, to the TacAI, the bigger threat and probably would have tried to take it out if it had the chance. But it was, instead, trying to swat the gnats running all around it. That distracted it, as it would with a real life crew. The problem is, as others have pointed out, this situation would not happen in real life so the TacAI is at an unrealistic disadvantage. It is that, not the TacAI, that needs to be addressed. As for the Carriers not bugging out... nothing we can do about that. If the vehicle is going FAST and not DIRECTLY at the enemy vehicle, it is likely to not change course. This is because the TacAI assumes you are NOT doing something gamey and instead thinks you have a realistic plan to get the Carriers out of harm's way. There is no way for it to know if this is in fact the case or not. We're working on it Steve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eridani Posted June 27, 2000 Share Posted June 27, 2000 I will yeild to popular opinion that my gameplay was "gamey"... Honestly at the time, I wasn't thinking about how I could exploit the computer, I was thinking "how the hell can I use what I have to NOT DIE here"... If that counts as gamey, than I'm sorry. The JPzIV was buttoned... I think one of the MMG carriers took out the TC but I'm not sure. Steve - I do DEFINATELY believe that the MMG carriers is too cheap. It should be about twice as expensive as a vickers MMG team IMHO (same capability, but mobile and armored) I dunno, something for a patch maybe? I do have to address the issue of "gamey" tactics though. Honestly, a game like CM is realistic ENOUGH that when I'm playing, I don't have a gamey filter. I use what I have to do whatever I possibly can to survive. I honestly think that my situation, while highly UNLIKELY, COULD have happened. the MMG carrier was fast and the driver knew it. and yes, one of them did bug out. Yes, in a way I was sending them to their deaths, but welcome to war. I sent enough of them and they moved fast enough that I gave them a chance. It wasn't like I was using a zook team or crew for recon-by-death EXPECTING them to die. I dunno... it just bothers me when I have to limit myself from a tactic that works, MIGHT work in real life, but didn't happen in history and is therefore considered gamey... *shrugs* but hey thats my humble opinion. BTW, I'm open for pbems if anyones up for a little challenge let me know if you want to castrate my thinking -EridanMan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kump Posted June 27, 2000 Share Posted June 27, 2000 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>The problem is, as others have pointed out, this situation would not happen in real life so the TacAI is at an unrealistic disadvantage. It is that, not the TacAI, that needs to be addressed.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Excellent! This is one time I love to be wrong, not counting all those other times I hated to be wrong. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>We're working on it <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Don't stop! The best keeps getting better! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts